Student workshop on the Quality Enhancement Project
• To introduce students to the CHE and public policy affecting higher education
• To introduce students to the Quality Enhancement Project (QEP)
• To begin a conversation about how students can be involved in promoting student success
• To identify ways in which students can be involved in the QEP
• To select regional QEP student representatives
Aims of the workshop
The White Paper on Post-School Education and Training (Department of Higher Education and Training, 2013) identifies the following institutions:
General education
Community colleges (including former FET colleges)
Private FET colleges
Further education
Technical and vocational education and training colleges (TVETs)
Government-funded, non-DHET post-school institutions
SETA-funded qualifications
Higher Education
Universities
Private Higher Education Institutions
Post-school educationNQF
1234
5
6789
10
23 Public HEIs
Universities of technology
TUT, VUT, CUT, DUT, MUT, CPUT
Comprehensive universities
Venda, UJ, UniZul, WSU, NMMU, UNISA
Universities
Limpopo (MEDUNSA), Pretoria, Wits, NWU, Free State, UKZN, Fort Hare, Rhodes, UWC, Stellenbosch, UCT
New: Sol Plaatjie, Mpumalanga
About 115 Private HEIs
Small single focus to large, multi-focus; certificate to PhD
Higher education
CHE is an independent, statutory body responsible for quality assurance and promotion. Its functions include:• providing advice to the Minister of Higher Education and
Training on all aspects of higher education policy.• developing and implementing a system of quality
assurance for higher education.• monitoring and reporting on the state of the higher
education system.• contributing to the development of higher education
through intellectual engagement with key national and systemic issues.
CHE is the Quality Council for Higher Education. It is responsible for implementation of the Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework.
The Council on Higher Education
Programme accreditation
ensures that minimum standards are met in HEI programmes
National reviews
specific programmes are evaluated and benchmarked nationally and internationally
Institutional audits
evaluate HEIs’ internal quality assurance mechanisms
Quality promotion and capacity development
training, information sharing and other development opportunities are provided to institutions
Four components of the CHE’s work
SA population 51.8 million
No. 15-19 year olds 5.0 million
No. 20-24 year-olds 5.4 million
No. HE students 938 200
20-24 year old participation rate 17%
Black African 14%
White 57%
Key statistics for 2011
Throughput rates for 3-year degree 2006 student cohort in public HEIs (excluding UNISA)
(VitalStats Public Higher Education 2011, CHE)
Throughput rates for 3-year degree 2006 student cohort in public HEIs (excluding UNISA) by race
“The data on the quality of university education is disturbing. South African universities are mid-level in terms of knowledge production, with low participation, high attrition rates and insufficient capacity to produce the required levels of skills. They are still characterised by historical inequities and distortions.”
National Development Plan 2012
Higher education can no longer be owned by a community of disciplinary connoisseurs who transmit knowledge to students. Both the complexity and uncertainty of society and the economy will require institutions to continuously adapt while upholding standards. In practice, institutions will have to learn how best to serve the student community. Students have become the focal point of our learning approach in many areas of the world.
(Fostering Quality Teaching in Higher Education: Policies and Practices)
OECD Sept 2012
Convergence of imperatives for change
National needsSocial justice,
Economic development
ZeitgeistUniversities taking responsibility
for their students’success
21st century skillsInter-personal,Information processingLife-long learning
Students
Quality Assurance:
“the means through which an institution ensures and confirms that the conditions are in place for students to achieve the standards set by it or by another awarding body” (UK QAA),
Quality Enhancement:
“has defined enhancement as taking deliberate steps to bring about improvement in the effectiveness of the learning experiences of students.” (Scottish QAA)
Quality assurance to Quality enhancement
The Quality Enhancement ProjectThe Second Cycle
The enhancement of student learning with a view to producing an increased number of graduates with attributes that are personally, professionally and socially valuable.
1. enhanced student learning, leading to an
2. increased number of graduates that have
3. improved graduate attributes
STUDENT SUCCESS
Focus of the Quality Enhancement Project
Collaboration is key
We need collective impact resulting from collective engagement– combining our knowledge, skills, wisdom and experience.
The problem is too big, too complicated, too important for fragmented, individualistic or ad hoc approaches.
“Despite years of effort, institutions have yet to develop a coherent framework to guide their thinking about which actions matter most and how they should be organized and successfully implemented. Too often, institutions invest in a laundry list of actions, one disconnected from the other.” (Vincent Tinto, 2012)
Efforts to promote student success need to be coherent, with a sound theoretical and evidence base.
Intellectual rigour is essential
Accountability is requiredDuring the past several decades greater societal demands for accountability have prevailed. This has obliged universities to demonstrate that learning is taking place. A greater emphasis is placed on measuring learning outcomes; it is no longer sufficient to measure the "inputs"-what is being taught and how the curriculum is delivered to the students.
(UNESCO 2009, Trends in Global Higher Education: Tracking an Academic Revolution )
• Institutions engaged simultaneously
• Four focus areas identified to start with for first two years
• Both individual institutions and collaborative groups of institutions will be involved
• Inductive and iterative (two phases)
Approach
Role players
DVCs CHEHEIs
QE reps
HESA
SAAIR
HELTASA
PROFBODIES
Both institutionally-based and nationally coordinated activities
Institutional enhancement
HE system enhancement
Institutional submissions
Analysis
Feedback
Collaboration
Analysis
Symposia, working groups
Projects of other bodies
Institutional capacity
development
Research projects
Select focus areas
Individual Institutional feedback
Feedback
Institutional reports
Process
Enhancing…
Teaching
Curriculum
Assessment
Learning resources
Student enrolment management
Academic student support and development
Non-academic student support and development
Academics as teachers
Student support
Learning environment
Course and programme enrolment
management
Focus areas for Phase 1
1. Enhancing academic as teachers
Including professional development, reward and recognition, workload, conditions of service and performance appraisal.
2. Enhancing student support and development
Including career and curriculum advising, life and academic skills development, counselling, student performance monitoring and referral.
3. Enhancing the learning environment
Including teaching and learning spaces, ICT infrastructure and access, technology-enabled tools and resources, library facilities.
4. Enhancing course and programme enrolment management
Including admissions, selection, placement, readmission refusal, pass rates in gateway courses, throughput rates, management information systems.
Phase 1 main activities (2014-2016)2014
2015
2016
QEP launch (27 Feb)QEP student workshop (4 Apr)Institutional QEP committee identifiedInstitutional submissions (1 Sept)AnalysisNational QEP meetingDVCs meetings
Collaborative group workshopsAnalysisNational and regional QEP meetingsDVCs meetingsInstitutional reports (30 Nov)Select new focus areas
Feedback to each institutionInstitutional submissions (Phase 2)AnalysisQEP meetingsDVCs meetings
• Benchmarks and codes of good practice for quality undergraduate provision
• Policy recommendations
• Tools and resources for improving student success
• Research
• Communities of practice
Raise the bar for what can be expected of institutions in promoting student success in future
Expected outcomes of the QEP
1. Enhancement of the quality of undergraduate provision
2. Enhancement of the quality of graduates
3. A higher education system that is improving continuously as members of the higher education community collaborate to share good practice and solve shared problems.
Broad desired outcomes
“Student success does not arise by chance. Nor does substantial improvement in institutional rates of student retention and graduation. It is the result of intentional, structured and proactive actions and policies directed towards the success of all students.”
(Vincent Tinto 2012)
Top Related